This week, we move to more future-focused visions of technology and education, and explore how utopian and dystopian stories (or ‘discourses’) are shaping our understanding of what is happening now in the sphere of learning technology, and what might happen in the future.
Our films this week offer a series of evocative and sometimes disturbing visions of what the future of information technology might hold. ‘Always on’, ubiquitous communication, embedded directly into our bodies or carried with us at all times, is presented in some films as a profound threat, in others as a thrilling opportunity. Above all, the question seems to be: who is set to benefit from the personal, constant attentions of information technology, and who might lose out?
The ‘ideas and interpretations’ resources this week introduce the notion of the metaphor as another lens (like determinism) through which to look at utopian and dystopian stories about e- learning and digital cultures. Wherever you see or read a metaphor this week, try to think of an alternative that might have been used – what difference do you think it would make?
And finally, we will explore some writing on open education, and MOOCs in particular, from the past six months, looking to see how promises and threats about the future of education are currently playing out in popular ed-tech and media.
These are two video advertisements - one from Corning, and one from Microsoft - setting out these companies’ visions of how their products will evolve and be used in the future. In both cases, the companies position their information technologies as completely integrated with daily life. Questions you might try to answer in the discussion boards, on Twitter, or in the form of an image are:
how is education being visualised here? what is being learned and taught?
what is the nature of communication in these future worlds?
are these utopian or a dystopian visions to you? In what way(s)?
Sight explores how the ubiquity of data and the increasingly blurry line between the digital and the material might play out in the sphere of human relationships. The focus on the emerging social and educational use of game-based ‘badging’ is particularly interesting. What is going on here, and how do you interpret the ending? How does this vision align and contrast with the ones in the first two films?
In this film, a young boy is about to reach the age where, in his society, he will be permanently ‘tagged’ by having a tracking device implanted in his body. A futuristic angle on a ‘coming of age’ story, the boy has to choose whether to submit to the requirements of his society, or seek a different life. By suggesting a degree of personal autonomy, the film diverges considerably from some of last week’s (new media, bendito machine III). To what extent does Charlie 13 represent a hopeful or a bleak future? How you answer this may depend on whether you see Charlie, and the resistance he represents, as a genuine alternative to the social and technological forces at work in this future society.
(*note - please be aware that there is some strong language in this film, which some might find offensive.)
Sharing the broad theme of surveillance with the previous film, Plurality throws some time travel into the mix and asks us to imagine a future where the population is monitored through their DNA, and resistance takes the shape of attempting to ‘jam’ the surveillance systems by inserting multiple selves into the grid (those who are familiar with the concept of the panopticonwill find the name of the system, and of one main character, amusing - and there is also reference to George Orwell’s 1984 in the name of the other main character). The grid can only function if absolute visibility of the movements and identities of the city’s inhabitants is maintained, and therefore practices of hacking become the ultimate threat. Those who are interested in some of the educational implications of this line of exploration might want to check out Cory Doctorow’s novel Little Brother (free to read online or download). To what extent do you think Plurality’s depictions of the impact of surveillance technologies are relevant to social and educational practices today? Which society (Charlie’s or Alana’s) would you rather find yourself in, and why?
Johnston draws from the key work of Lakoff and Johnson to highlight the important work that metaphors do in shaping our thinking. She identifies two broad categories of metaphors drawn from the titles of editorials about the internet in late 2008 - those that take a utopian perspective (salvation - transformative and revolutionary) and those that are dystopian (destruction - attacking and supplanting). Last week we explored how to identify and consider determinist positions about digital cultures and e-learning. Noticing the sorts of metaphors that are used to draw comparisons between the unfamiliar and the familiar, or the abstract and the concrete, can be another very useful way of understanding the assumptions that people are making about e- learning (the ‘native’ and the ‘immigrant’, for example). In the next ‘perspectives’ section, we will look at some MOOC-related articles, and this will be a great opportunity to do a bit of metaphor analysis of your own. What examples of both ‘salvation’ and ‘destruction’ metaphors can you find in these, or other MOOC reports and editorials? How does Shirky’s metaphor of the MP3, for example, create a certain kind of story around the MOOC?
Newitz, A. (2011): Social media is science fiction. Google I/O conference, 10-11 May 2011, San Francisco.
This video should begin at minute 7:00 (if it doesn't, start at 7:00 yourself), where Annalee Newitz describes four common stories that science fiction tells us about the future of social media. Her talk lasts about 5 minutes. What do these stories indicate about our future options and relations with technology? And what do they tell us about our preoccupations and assumptions now (or in the recent past)? To what extent are they structured by the utopia-dystopia oppostion? (special poll for the sci-fi fans among us - how many of the books, tv shows and films that Newitz references have you read or seen? Link to the poll here.)
Advanced
Bleecker, J. (2006). A manifesto for networked objects — Cohabiting with pigeons, arphids and Aibos in the Internet of Things.
This article looks ahead to the increasing potential for objects connected to the Internet, the so- called Internet of Things, to interact with each other and with humans by blogging (Bleecker calls these objects ‘blogjects’). The paper looks forward to a cacophony of inanimate objects murmuring in cyberspace or getting lost in their own private conversations. Bleecker stresses that it is the networked, communicative nature of Things that is important - what they say, and to whom - not their technical ability to store and transmit data:
The significance of the Internet of Things is not at all about instrumented machine-to-machine communication, or sensors that spew reams of data credit card transactions, or quantities of water flows, or records of how many vehicles passed a particular checkpoint along a highway. Those sensor-based things are lifeless, asocial recording instruments when placed alongside of the Blogject. (p.15)
While Bleecker sees this future in largely utopian terms, you might consider it in light of this week’s films, and sketch out some of the ways that a future of blogjects might present some complex ethical and practical problems. Can you find some more recent examples of developments that fit into Bleecker’s vision of ‘cohabiting with pigeons’?
These two pieces fit together as an initial opinion piece (Shirky) and a critical response (Bady). Together, they provide a good overview of current debates about MOOCs, expressing hopes and fears about what a digital revolution in higher education might be like.
Shirky embraces the perspective that higher education is broken (expensive, limiting, elitist), and suggests that the MP3 (the most common file format for digital music) is a good metaphor for the MOOC. Telling a story of the music industry as surprised, then overcome by the emergence of the MP3, Shirky frames the narrative of higher education in similar terms, warning that institutions are not prepared for the revolution that MOOCs will bring. Dismissing one MOOC critic’s focus on quality, Shirky argues that openness will lead to improved quality: ‘open courses, even in their nascent state, will be able to raise quality and improve certification faster than traditional institutions can lower cost or increase enrollment’.
Bady (along with claiming that Shirky sets up his argument so that academics cannot respond without looking defensive) wonders whether the music metaphor, and Shirky’s emphasis on openness, obscure a massive, profit-driven business underpinning MOOC development. He argues that ‘open vs. closed is a useful conceptual distinction, but when it comes down to specific cases, these kinds of grand narratives can mislead us’. He asks, of Shirky’s claim that most higher education is expensive and mediocre, ‘would it be any less mediocre if it were free?’.
Is it possible for MOOCs to be ‘education of the very best sort’? Is this their mission? If not, what is?
Campbell, Gardner (2012). Ecologies of Yearning. Keynote at Open Ed '12, October 16, 2012, Vancouver BC. (63:19)
This keynote address is an hour long, and it is quite complex. Campbell draws on Bateson’s 'orders of learning' to explore what open education is, and is not, doing, and what it might do. Using Bateson’s metaphor of the double bind to describe the situation many students (and teachers) find themselves in, Campbell urges that we attempt to make space for double takes, and for what he calls ‘opening education’, which ‘has to provide hospitality, a feeling of home, not so confusion is reduced but so confusion is strengthened’. This lecture is important this week because it addresses learning as a difficult problem - perhaps the difficult problem - and not as a natural consequence of free access to information. As a contrast with the other educational perspectives this week, it serves as a warning that what we really want - our utopia - is not necessarily to be found in the structures we are putting in place (or finding ourselves within). As we move on next week to talk about how digital culture and digital education might ask us to reconsider the meaning of ‘the human’, let’s leave this week with a big question for pondering: what does ‘opening education’ mean for you?
If you want to dig deeper into how the media is representing the emergence of MOOCs, and continue your hunt for metaphors, we recommend these two pieces. The comments on both are also worth exploring. What metaphors can you identify in these, and how are they operating to position MOOCs?
Our films this week offer a series of evocative and sometimes disturbing visions of what the future of information technology might hold. ‘Always on’, ubiquitous communication, embedded directly into our bodies or carried with us at all times, is presented in some films as a profound threat, in others as a thrilling opportunity. Above all, the question seems to be: who is set to benefit from the personal, constant attentions of information technology, and who might lose out?
The ‘ideas and interpretations’ resources this week introduce the notion of the metaphor as another lens (like determinism) through which to look at utopian and dystopian stories about e- learning and digital cultures. Wherever you see or read a metaphor this week, try to think of an alternative that might have been used – what difference do you think it would make?
And finally, we will explore some writing on open education, and MOOCs in particular, from the past six months, looking to see how promises and threats about the future of education are currently playing out in popular ed-tech and media.
Popular cultures
**Watch on YouTube**
**Watch on YouTube**
**Watch on Vimeo**
**Watch on YouTube**
Sharing the broad theme of surveillance with the previous film, Plurality throws some time travel into the mix and asks us to imagine a future where the population is monitored through their DNA, and resistance takes the shape of attempting to ‘jam’ the surveillance systems by inserting multiple selves into the grid (those who are familiar with the concept of the panopticonwill find the name of the system, and of one main character, amusing - and there is also reference to George Orwell’s 1984 in the name of the other main character). The grid can only function if absolute visibility of the movements and identities of the city’s inhabitants is maintained, and therefore practices of hacking become the ultimate threat. Those who are interested in some of the educational implications of this line of exploration might want to check out Cory Doctorow’s novel Little Brother (free to read online or download). To what extent do you think Plurality’s depictions of the impact of surveillance technologies are relevant to social and educational practices today? Which society (Charlie’s or Alana’s) would you rather find yourself in, and why?
Ideas and interpretations
Core
Johnston, R (2009) Salvation or destruction: metaphors of the internet. First Monday, 14(4).http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2370/2158
Johnston draws from the key work of Lakoff and Johnson to highlight the important work that metaphors do in shaping our thinking. She identifies two broad categories of metaphors drawn from the titles of editorials about the internet in late 2008 - those that take a utopian perspective (salvation - transformative and revolutionary) and those that are dystopian (destruction - attacking and supplanting). Last week we explored how to identify and consider determinist positions about digital cultures and e-learning. Noticing the sorts of metaphors that are used to draw comparisons between the unfamiliar and the familiar, or the abstract and the concrete, can be another very useful way of understanding the assumptions that people are making about e- learning (the ‘native’ and the ‘immigrant’, for example). In the next ‘perspectives’ section, we will look at some MOOC-related articles, and this will be a great opportunity to do a bit of metaphor analysis of your own. What examples of both ‘salvation’ and ‘destruction’ metaphors can you find in these, or other MOOC reports and editorials? How does Shirky’s metaphor of the MP3, for example, create a certain kind of story around the MOOC?
Newitz, A. (2011): Social media is science fiction. Google I/O conference, 10-11 May 2011, San Francisco.
**Watch on YouTube**
This video should begin at minute 7:00 (if it doesn't, start at 7:00 yourself), where Annalee Newitz describes four common stories that science fiction tells us about the future of social media. Her talk lasts about 5 minutes. What do these stories indicate about our future options and relations with technology? And what do they tell us about our preoccupations and assumptions now (or in the recent past)? To what extent are they structured by the utopia-dystopia oppostion? (special poll for the sci-fi fans among us - how many of the books, tv shows and films that Newitz references have you read or seen? Link to the poll here.)
Advanced
Bleecker, J. (2006). A manifesto for networked objects — Cohabiting with pigeons, arphids and Aibos in the Internet of Things.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/14748019/Why-Things-Matter
This article looks ahead to the increasing potential for objects connected to the Internet, the so- called Internet of Things, to interact with each other and with humans by blogging (Bleecker calls these objects ‘blogjects’). The paper looks forward to a cacophony of inanimate objects murmuring in cyberspace or getting lost in their own private conversations. Bleecker stresses that it is the networked, communicative nature of Things that is important - what they say, and to whom - not their technical ability to store and transmit data:
While Bleecker sees this future in largely utopian terms, you might consider it in light of this week’s films, and sketch out some of the ways that a future of blogjects might present some complex ethical and practical problems. Can you find some more recent examples of developments that fit into Bleecker’s vision of ‘cohabiting with pigeons’?
Perspectives on education
Shirky, C. (2012). Napster, Udacity and the academy. shirky.com, 12 November 2012.http://www.shirky.com/weblog/2012/11/napster-udacity-and-the-academy/
Bady, A. (2012). Questioning Clay Shirky. Inside Higher Ed, 6 December 2012.http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2012/12/06/essay-critiques-ideas-clay-shirky-and-others-advocating-higher-ed-disruption
These two pieces fit together as an initial opinion piece (Shirky) and a critical response (Bady). Together, they provide a good overview of current debates about MOOCs, expressing hopes and fears about what a digital revolution in higher education might be like.
Shirky embraces the perspective that higher education is broken (expensive, limiting, elitist), and suggests that the MP3 (the most common file format for digital music) is a good metaphor for the MOOC. Telling a story of the music industry as surprised, then overcome by the emergence of the MP3, Shirky frames the narrative of higher education in similar terms, warning that institutions are not prepared for the revolution that MOOCs will bring. Dismissing one MOOC critic’s focus on quality, Shirky argues that openness will lead to improved quality: ‘open courses, even in their nascent state, will be able to raise quality and improve certification faster than traditional institutions can lower cost or increase enrollment’.
Bady (along with claiming that Shirky sets up his argument so that academics cannot respond without looking defensive) wonders whether the music metaphor, and Shirky’s emphasis on openness, obscure a massive, profit-driven business underpinning MOOC development. He argues that ‘open vs. closed is a useful conceptual distinction, but when it comes down to specific cases, these kinds of grand narratives can mislead us’. He asks, of Shirky’s claim that most higher education is expensive and mediocre, ‘would it be any less mediocre if it were free?’.
Is it possible for MOOCs to be ‘education of the very best sort’? Is this their mission? If not, what is?
Campbell, Gardner (2012). Ecologies of Yearning. Keynote at Open Ed '12, October 16, 2012, Vancouver BC. (63:19)
**Watch on YouTube**
This keynote address is an hour long, and it is quite complex. Campbell draws on Bateson’s 'orders of learning' to explore what open education is, and is not, doing, and what it might do. Using Bateson’s metaphor of the double bind to describe the situation many students (and teachers) find themselves in, Campbell urges that we attempt to make space for double takes, and for what he calls ‘opening education’, which ‘has to provide hospitality, a feeling of home, not so confusion is reduced but so confusion is strengthened’. This lecture is important this week because it addresses learning as a difficult problem - perhaps the difficult problem - and not as a natural consequence of free access to information. As a contrast with the other educational perspectives this week, it serves as a warning that what we really want - our utopia - is not necessarily to be found in the structures we are putting in place (or finding ourselves within). As we move on next week to talk about how digital culture and digital education might ask us to reconsider the meaning of ‘the human’, let’s leave this week with a big question for pondering: what does ‘opening education’ mean for you?
Optional extra material for this lecture:
Audrey Watters’ Storify notes: http://storify.com/audreywatters/ecologies-of-yearning-and-the-future-of-open-educa
Richard Sebastian’s blog post: http://edtech.vccs.edu/openness-the-double-bind-and-ecologies-of-yearning/
And there’s more....
If you want to dig deeper into how the media is representing the emergence of MOOCs, and continue your hunt for metaphors, we recommend these two pieces. The comments on both are also worth exploring. What metaphors can you identify in these, and how are they operating to position MOOCs?
Anderson, N. (2012). Elite education for the masses. The Washington Post, 4 November 2012.http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/elite-education-for-the-masses/2012/11/03/c2ac8144-121b-11e2-ba83-a7a396e6b2a7_story.html
Carr, N. (2012). The Crisis in Higher Education. MIT Technology Review,http://www.technologyreview.com/featuredstory/429376/the-crisis-in-higher-education/